Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added a way to handle 4096/4096 and 0 #98

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Mar 9, 2023

Conversation

Alopalao
Copy link

@Alopalao Alopalao commented Feb 8, 2023

Related to mef_eline PR #258

Summary

From MatchDLVLAN.as_of_tlv(), self.value now can be non-existent VlanId.OFPVID_NONE
From MatchDLVLAN.from_of_tlv(), tlv.oxm_value now can handle the any case with oxm_value = '4096/4096'

Local Tests

Installing this EVC through mef_eline api:

{
    "name": "my evc1",
    "dynamic_backup_path": true,
    "enabled": true,
    "uni_a": {
        "tag": {"tag_type": 1, "value": "any"},
        "interface_id": "00:00:00:00:00:00:00:01:1"
        },
    "uni_z": {
        "tag": {"tag_type": 1, "value": "untagged"},
        "interface_id": "00:00:00:00:00:00:00:02:1"
        }
}

Does not trigger consistency check loop (alien, delete, missing, install) with different values for the UNI tags. Confirming that the de-serialization is working as desired.

v0x04/match_fields.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Alopalao Alopalao marked this pull request as ready for review February 8, 2023 20:40
@viniarck viniarck requested a review from a team February 9, 2023 21:02
Copy link
Member

@viniarck viniarck left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A conditional introduced doesn't look right to me, if you could double check. I left more information in the comment. Thanks.

v0x04/match_fields.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Alopalao Alopalao changed the title Added a way to handle vlanId as str Added a way to handle 4096/4096 and 0 Feb 21, 2023
Copy link
Member

@viniarck viniarck left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@Alopalao this is getting close to land, could you also update the changelog and also add explain which local tests you've run to confirm this? Let's also add e2e tests to cover these cases before merging this, specially since it's protocol dependent, so the earlier we have this cov on OvS with e2e tests the better. Thanks

CHANGELOG.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@viniarck viniarck left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@Alopalao I'll leave this PR pre-approved.

When kytos-ng/kytos-end-to-end-tests#210, feel free to merge it as well. In this PR here, the only small remaining changes are a suggestion in the changelog, and maybe the extra unit test, but since you're unit test is already covering maybe we don't need that either, I'll leave it up to you.

Co-authored-by: Vinicius Arcanjo <[email protected]>
@Alopalao Alopalao merged commit aa35985 into kytos-ng:master Mar 9, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants